humansciencefandomcom-20200214-history
Emergence of the Conscious Individual
Martin Luther emerged as a conscious soul, -- the spiritual Individual – emancipated man from the superstitious autocratic clergy. That incipient emergence had a long way to go before the conscious political Individual could emerge. He had to wait the birth of democracy and free market as a collective base for him. Now is the time for the birth of such a conscious political individual. Maybe we have to wait a little longer for the advent of the conscious social individual. Several questions arise regarding who the conscious individual is, what his characteristics are and what the pre-requisites are for his birth. The main ideas are given below: *The process of the collective evolution is preceded and succeeded by individuals who are self-conscious and collectively conscious. *Any revolutionary change is preceded by rebels who are heroes and whose main work is to fight against the existing order and break it. *Those who succeed are builders, the ones who build the new society. *Both are conscious individuals, conscious of breaking and building. *The breaking of the old must be done so that the old would not resurrect itself any more. *The old order may remain as remnants but not as seeds capable of sprouting again. *For one who wants to build, the task is far more onerous. *For, each value he has to create must be preceded by ideas approved of by the collectivity, by energy that is overwhelmingly released by an appreciative society, by physical habits that are benefits and enjoyable that can be shaped into a social organisation. *In the democratic society that we envisage, the host of institutions that are to be born and come to stay are many. They are education, production, distribution, communication, transport, law and order, etc. *Every such institution must be wedded to the ideals of democracy in its belief and practice. It must be aimed at the creation of a conscious individual in every centre of its activity. *Today the presence of conscious individuals does not make itself felt. In fact, at crucial moments these conscious persons degenerate into social citizens. *The immediate task is to emancipate the individual from his social consciousness which negatively oppresses him. *What leads the society today is social consciousness through conformity rather than individual awareness through rationality. *The power yet lies in conforming to the majority, not in appreciating the rationality of a situation. *We can say the conscious Individual has emerged when such individuals have power to lead the society by virtue of their RATIONALITY. *When rationality rules, the conscious individual has the right social climate in which he can emerge. *Before vital conformity took over the social arena, what ruled was physical prowess. *Muscle power demanded obedience and submission and imposed them on the population. *The social emotions of that period of physical domination themselves were physical emotions. *The crux of it was seen in the fact that aspiring for the throne was considered to be treason. Men were ashamed of such a thought. *Presently highly educated men are comfortable in espousing social emotions such as conformity. One finds it embarrassing to be non-conforming. *Personally people may insist on their individual opinion and individuality, but when it comes to social action, individuality gives way to social conformity. *Our view is that the conscious Individual and rationality must emerge. *An opinion that mass production reflected industrialized society prevails. If this is true, the standardized product leaves little room for individuality. *The trend of individual preference being given an important place in mass production may indicate the emergence of the Individual. *We can say that in this century the Individual emerged, in that the collective society conceded the importance of the individual and the individual himself espouses or professes that view as conformity with the collective. *One important reason for the present tendency to conformity is the individual does not have and cannot hope to have an individual existence apart from the wider collective. There is no question of the lone individualistic person surviving and having a life of his own in defiance of the collective. *Law and order of any nation do provide for individual physical security. *Social opinion does not permit the individual that security. The pioneer is not adored but dreaded as a rebel. *Society must mature in its collective emotions to respect the individual who has the vision and courage to differ. Such pioneers must become the loved and respected members of the society and inspire many others to beat a new track, a track of their own. *Suppose a significant minority of the society – say 5% or 10% -- becomes such conscious individuals who refuse to toe the line of a senior member of their profession, and who accept that member’s professions only on examination, the society can be said to be mature in this respect. *Presently no profession or walk of academic or political life can boast of even a handful of persons who are INDIVIDUALS in that sense. *Sixteenth and Seventeenth centuries ushered in science, but the scientists of those centuries were only a handful. We can rightfully call this a scientific century, as society has given birth to scientists in large number. Maybe they make up one or two percent of the society. *Imagine a country where one or two percent of its population are conscious individuals. Surely they would lead the nation. That would put rationality on the throne, ousting conformity. *Democracy alone can foster such a growth, not dictatorship. *The abolition of WAR as a possibility from the collective consciousness, surplus food production, guaranteed employment, and recognition of the individual as the ultimate resource will foster the emergence of such individuals. *A theory of social development that points to the possibility or even inevitability of their advent is on the agenda for the closing year of this century. *Today’s population in industrialised countries has more than one percent graduates who are scientists. *Perhaps it constitutes the critical mass needed to ensure the scientific temper of the masses. *If any one among the masses chooses to be a scientist, he has the full potential for it. *The conscious individual we describe will in the near future constitute such a percentage of the population. It may be anywhere between 1 and 5%. *With them as the cream of the society, the entire society will be wedded to rationality, even as our present society is wedded to scientific progress. *Today unscientific ways of life either in healing or as a belief that guides one’s life have little scope of survival. *With the birth of the conscious Individual, a new era begins. *When the population of conscious individuals attains to that critical mass, society will, in most of its ways of life, outgrow irrationality. *Each one of such individuals, by virtue of his inherent capacities, will be able to function as the head of his nation. *Democracy has given every citizen the right to become the head of the nation. The birth of the conscious Individual as a type and its coming to stay in the population as a critical mass, will give each such individual the POWER to become the head of his nation. *Knowledge is power when it becomes conscious knowledge. *Conceptual knowledge offers clarity but cannot mature into conscious knowledge. *Knowledge becomes conscious knowledge when it is born out of field experience. Hence it carries the power to effectuate. *Education offers in a couple of decades what mankind acquires in a couple of millennia. *When education moves from specialising parts to their wholes that can be visualised, it can become a training of mind that turns the conceptual education into one that carries the power of experience. *The essence or power of experience is transferable through education. *Those who receive that education can emerge as conscious individuals. *Such individuals can become the head of their nation if they aspire for it. *Democracy can thus move from giving the individual the right to be the head of the nation to giving him the POWER to become the head of the nation. *Evolution of democracy points in that direction. *Rationality that is different from impressionist beliefs is capable of embracing the whole, rather has the need to embrace the whole. *The conscious individual’s whole is the society. Here it is his nation. *The rational conclusions he arrives at are powerful as they are of the experiences of the whole nation. *The power of the experience of the whole nation is the power that can rule over it. *Therefore, the conscious Individual is always capable of becoming the head of his nation. *Moving from knowledge to power: Conceptual knowledge of Level 1 (the thinking mind) becomes knowledge of power in Level 3 (the dynamic mind). The mental emotions which the concept generates in Level 2 (emotional mind) convert the concept into power. *Moving from experience to knowledge: When the experiential knowledge of No. 3 sheds the emotions of the experience, the knowledge matures into concept in Level 1. *Conscious knowledge that is power is achieved by the atmosphere, values, education that is training and extracting the essence from experience. *Experience is physical, essence is mental, education that is training uses the energy of the vital, values are spiritual, atmosphere which is also spiritual is the whole that binds all the parts together. *Knowledge that moves from physical to mental moves from unconsciousness to being conscious. *The power of the physical is carried to the knowledge of the mental by values. http://server3.web-stat.com/4/humanscience.gif [http://www.web-stat.com/checkstats1.htm H] Category:Democracy Category:Development